Harvey v. Lake Buena Vista Resort, LLC, 010509 FED11, 08-13494
|Opinion Judge:||PER CURIAM:|
|Party Name:||RICKY HARVEY, CHRISTINE ANN HARVEY, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. LAKE BUENA VISTA RESORT, LLC, Defendant-Appellant.|
|Judge Panel:||Before CARNES, WILSON and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.|
|Case Date:||January 05, 2009|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit|
DO NOT PUBLISH
Appeal from the United States District Court Docket No. 07-01641-CV-ORL-DAB for the Middle District of Florida.
Lake Buena Vista Resort appeals the summary judgment in favor of Ricky and Christine Harvey. The district court concluded that the Resort violated the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act by failing to provide the Harveys with a property report and the district court concluded, in the alternative, that the Resort breached its contract with the Harveys by failing to complete their condominium within two years. We affirm on the alternative ground.
On September 30, 2005, the Harveys executed a contract to purchase a condominium in Orlando, Florida, from Lake Buena Vista Resort. Several provisions of the contract stated that the transaction qualified for exemption from the Interstate Land Sales Act. Paragraph fourteen of the contract required completion of the unit within two years of execution of the contract except for events or occurrences that would render timely completion impossible. In August 2007, the Harveys sought rescission of the contract and a refund of their deposits on the ground that the Resort had violated the Act. The Resort refused to rescind the contract and delivered to the Harveys a certificate of occupancy on October 4, 2007.
Eleven days later, the Harveys filed a complaint that alleged the Resort violated the Act and breached their contract under Florida law. The Harveys alleged that the Resort did not provide a property report as required by the Act and the Resort failed to complete construction of the condominium within two years as required by the contract.
The Harveys moved for summary judgment, and the magistrate judge, who the parties consented to resolve the action, granted the Harveys' motion. The magistrate judge concluded that the Resort was not entitled to an exemption from the Act because the force majeure and presale contingency clauses made the agreement to build the condominium within two years illusory. The magistrate judge concluded that the Resort violated the Act by failing to give the Harveys a property...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP